Sun-Maid Raisins Class Action Says ‘No Sugar Added’ Label is Deceptive

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

A California man says Sun-Maid raisins are deceptively labeled to give the impression they contain less sugar than competitor brands of raisins.

Plaintiff Jonathan Saghian is challenging the labeling on Sun-Maid Natural California Raisins and Sun-Maid California Golden Raisins, both products of defendant Sun-Maid Growers of California.

Saghian claims that by labeling these products as having “no sugar added,” Sun-Maid is violating federal food labeling regulations and deceiving consumers into buying a product they would not have bought otherwise.

According to Saghian’s Sun-Maid class action lawsuit, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has promulgated regulations specifically governing the use of the term “no sugar added.” One of the requirements for such labeling is that the food product so labeled be of a type that “normally contains added sugars.”

Raisins don’t meet that description, according to Saghian. He claims that however they are packaged and branded, it’s standard practice to present raisins to the consumer just as they are, with no added sugar.

But unlike the labeling of competitor brands, the labeling on both Sun-Maid products at issue shows the indicator “No Sugar Added” on the front of the package. He includes with his Sun-Maid class action lawsuit several photos of the packaging for competitor brands of raisins, none of which mentions sugar on its ingredient list.

The FDA explains that the purpose of “no sugar added” labeling is to “present[] consumers with information that allows them to differentiate between similar foods that would normally be expected to contain added sugars.”

The “no sugar added” indicator gives consumers the impression that the labeled product is of a type that normally contains added sugar, Saghian argues. It implies that compared to other, similar, products, the labeled product contains less sugar – and is therefore healthier and a better value.

Yet the sugar content in Sun-Maid raisins is comparable to – and in some cases greater than – that of competitor brands of raisins, Saghian claims. Both types of Sun-Maid raisins contain 29 grams of sugar, the same content as is found in competitor brands. Two such brands, Great Value California Raisins and Dole California Seedless Raisins, contain less sugar, at 24 grams per serving.

Saghian says that he and members of the proposed Class relied on the “no sugar added” indicator when they chose to buy Sun-Maid raisins. He claims the labeling gave them the false impression that Sun-Maid raisins are less sugary and a better value than other brands of raisins, when in fact their sugar content is the same or even greater.

Saghian seeks to represent a proposed plaintiff Class including all persons in the U.S. who purchased either Sun-Maid Natural California Raisins or Sun-Maid California Golden Raisins during the applicable statutory limitations period. He also proposes two subclasses of California Class Members for purposes of bringing claims under California law.

Saghian is represented by attorneys Barbara A. Rohr and Benjamin Heikali of Faruqi & Faruqi LLP.

The Sun-Maid Raisins Deceptive Labeling Class Action Lawsuit is Jonathan Saghian v. Sun-Maid Growers of California, Case No. 2:17-cv-05013, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.